Graham was calling his own plays last year in Denver

[Art]

Funny story just told on WTEM, said to come from an "inside" source, about the Denver game. It was said that when Graham came in, they had immobilized Banks' head, for fear of a neck injury. Because they didn't take his helmet off, they couldn't switch the communication to Graham's helmet, and they said only one helmet at a time can have that communication.

Banks was listening to the game on his radio helmet and watching Graham, who was not in communication with the sideline, actually calling his own plays and calling plays to go to Westbrook. I've no idea the validity of this story, but it's hysterical .

[MarkPSkins]

I was listening to the SportsReporters on WTEM a few ago and they said that they heard that during last year's game at Denver when Banks got hurt, they couldn't remove his helmet right away due to the nature of the injury to Banks neck, so they could not switch the live feeds to the helmet of the QB. Graham went on the field and couldn't receive the play calls from the bench. Graham called the plays on the field. Throwing numerous times to Westbrook.

The reason why they couldn't switch the feeds was unclear, but I find it funny that the plays Graham was calling were work as opposed to the one previous to him coming. Not a real testimony to the adept play calling of Jimmy Raye.

I wonder how many calls Westbrook would have gotten had Raye been calling the plays. And I wonder if we would have won that game at all if Raye had called the plays. Too funny.

[MarkPSkins]

Damn Art, I finally have something orginal to submit to the board and you beat me to it...you bastage.

[wildbill]

That's too funny. One things for sure though. If Banks doesn't get hurt we lose that game.

Man was that team boring to watch and listen to last year. Bye-Bye run-run-pass-punt.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Art

Funny story just told on WTEM, said to come from an "inside" source, about the Denver game. It was said that when Graham came in, they had immobilized Banks' head, for fear of a neck injury. Because they didn't take his helmet off, they couldn't switch the communication to Graham's helmet, and they said only one helmet at a time can have that communication.

Banks was listening to the game on his radio helmet and watching Graham, who was not in communication with the sideline, actually calling his own plays and calling plays to go to Westbrook. I've no idea the validity of this story, but it's hysterical .

I figured as much. Graham came in and suddenly started throwing completion after completion to Westbrook. But he was back to the bench the next game, despite Banks's concussion.

(Standard medical advice would be for Banks to sit out the next game.)

I always figured that Marty was embarrassed by Graham's success throwing to Westbrook, because it showed that Graham was the superior QB to Banks, and Westbrook was the superior receiver to Gardner -- when Marty was pushing Banks/Gardner all year long. I also figured there was more to this story -- that Graham just decided to throw to Westbrook even if Gardner was the primary receiver, and that Marty was punishing Graham for that insolence (by setting him back on the bench after the game).

Graham did have one "swan song" in the final Cardinals game, with my favorite pass of the year. Subbing for Banks momentarily, on a critical third-down play, Graham found himself being tackled from the right side. He shifted the ball to his left hand and shovel-passed a completion through the line (to K-J) that saved the drive and the game for the team. ... And back to the bench he went, of course.

I would have liked to see Graham retained over Sage in the off-season. He wanted to return, but was rebuffed.

[JimboDaMan]

Its a little unusual but not unheard of to win a game because your starting QB is knocked out of commission. But to win the game because your offensive coordinator is knocked out of commission is beyond ridiculous. How much worse could that guy have been?

[Dirk Diggler]

That's why Graham got benched the next week against Philly -- god forbid we have an offense that could actually move the ball :laugh:

[Murilo Bustamante]

Great story!

I've always believed that coaches should let QBs call more of the plays. I think if you have a smart QB (and I think all of our QBs right now are smart) it can be a real advantage.

I hated the way Norv didn't trust his QBs and forced them to call timeouts if they didn't like what they saw.

[Zen-like Todd]

Well, you're going to get your wish, because this is the super-duper-audible-like-a-mofo offense.

[bulldog]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

the offense ran better without an offensive coordinator or input from Marty, big surprise :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[indyskinsfan]

Well I'llbe dam***, that is the second revelation I got today on Marty I don't like at all!!!

Now the Westbrook instead of Gardner part made sense, but to think that Graham called his own plays, used the receiver that Raye claimed just wasn't doing it and then Marty benches Graham, not because continuity was a concern, but pure jealousy, is a mutha!

OK, I need a furiggin'

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by indyskinsfan

Well I'llbe dam***, that is the second revelation I got today on Marty I don't like at all!!!

Now the Westbrook instead of Gardner part made sense, but to think that Graham called his own plays, used the receiver that Raye claimed just wasn't doing it and then Marty benches Graham, not because continuity was a concern, but pure jealousy, is a mutha!

OK, I need a furiggin'

That's *still* not the whole story.

Few people are aware how much Marty scr!wed Westbrook last year. Pleading poverty in the offseason before the 2001 season, Marty the GM induced Westbrook to drop his base salary (which was high) to a minimal base with performance incentives to make up the difference. Westbrook figured he couldn't lose, since he assumed he could make the performance incentives. But then Marty absolutely refused to throw him the ball.

A lot of people in this forum have ragged on Westbrook, and they figured he just wasn't performing in 2001. But the guy was clearly open much of the time and just not being thrown to. Despite more passes being thrown to Gardner, Westbrook still finished with more catches, but short of his performance incentives.

The Denver game showed the dirty pool for all to see. Graham came in and won the game in the rain just by throwing to Westbrook repeatedly in the rain. You'd think Denver would adjust, but they never could stop Graham and Westbrook. And for this "heroism", Graham was benched and Marty/Raye went back to ignoring Westbrook.

All the dumb things Westbrook ever did don't compare to the dishonorable, stubborn and frankly stupid conduct by Marty last year regarding Westbrook. I couldn't wait for Marty to be fired.

We're still paying the cost for Marty by not having Westbrook. If he had been allowed to be the primary receiver and worked in a sane offense, I bet the team would have made more of an effort to re-sign him in the offseason.

All right, Westbrook haters -- it's time to load up the bandwagon and start flaming.

[OrangeSkin]

ASF, Westbrook was not with this team for only one year. He was on the roster for 7 years, and he had 7 years to prove himself. He never did. Bottom line, case closed.

[NavyDave]

Several of us pointed out that he was being freezed out to not meet incentives I was definately on Marty's a$$ about it.

And it is funny how subtle the slams towards marty have been today up at camp.

[bulldog]

the bottom line is this. the team needed to replace BOTH Marty AND Westbrook to move forward.

Marty has been in the NFL for 15 years as a head coach and has never landed in a Super Bowl except as a commentator.

Westbrook has had one solid season in 7 years and that was during a campaign where he was supported by a 1,400 yard rusher and a quarterback that threw for 3,000 yards.

the plain truth is Westbrook is just not suited to being a true go-to receiver in the NFL. He is not an instinctual player, he is a more talented version of Alvin Harper, a guy with measureables who is trying to fit that into playing in the pros.

He is not a receiver first. and it shows. it shows in his inability to execute two of the plays that are usually the bread and butter of player with his size and speed, namely the slant and cross.

I can't believe that after 7 years a guy can't learn how to cut inside keep the defender on his outside hip and catch the football consistently.

But he couldn't do it. He also was poor at catching the ball over the middle on the intermediate crosses.

So, Norv was left to using Westbrook almost exclusively on the outside, running deep routes and allowing Michael to outduel corners down the field using his speed and leaping ability.

but that is the stuff of a #2 receiver.

A true #1 receiver can do BOTH. He can be a dependable pair of hands on the shorter routes to pick up key first downs and ALSO can be a guy that can get behind and run through defenses downfield.

You watch Jimmy Smith, Terrell Owens, Rod Smith play and you realize how far short a guy like Westbrook falls from being the kind of player to lead a team in the playoffs and to the Super Bowl as an impact player.

Sad, but true. 6'3 and 220 and 4.45 look great on the stat sheet but when you look up and it is third and 8 do you have confidence that Westbrook is going to convert the play?

Not like you did with Art Monk, Gary Clark, Charley Taylor, Henry Ellard, Ricky Sanders or any of the other above average or better receivers the Redskins have had over the past 25 or 30 years.

[Carlito Sway]

That's one for Redskins lore.

The final drive leading to a Rasby TD was awesome; the highlight of the seaon wrap I edited. Graham was so cool, so calm, so solid. I was behind Jimmy Raye all the while, but if this is true, you have to marvel at Kent's ability to win at any cost.

Certainly, Westbrook had no greater friend on the team than Kent. I'll never forget that drive, and if it's all Graham, kudos!

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Smootylicious

Certainly, Westbrook had no greater friend on the team than Kent.

Funny -- my wife saw that game. Ever since, she referred to Westbrook and Graham as girlfriends. As in, "There's Westbrook. Is his girlfriend playing today?"

[Utah]

Ok guys, since Westbrook has been isolated here, lets actually put a bit of a spin on this.

What player, who did not play HB or FB, shined on the Redskins over the last 10 years?

I think all of the Westbrook bashing is simply because he was the highest pick we have had in the last 8 years that was still with the team and he had Norv written all over him.

You would think, reading what some of you guys have said, that Westbrook was the key to us not being any good over the last 10 years. In fact, if it wasn't for Norv and MW, we probably would of challenged for the title the last 5 years.

I could be wrong, but people come out in droves when anyone has anyting good to say about Norv or MW or that maybe they didn't get a chance to prove themselves. In fact, ANY MW or Norv "good job" threads that are posted are met with stern and powerful comments with loads of "facts" to back up everybody's negetive opinion.

Its in the past. They are gone. For one reason or another, they didn't make it here. Why? For reasons that haven't even been mentioned and won't be because none of us are in the know at Redskins Park.

The funny part about the whole MW and Norv bashing that goes on is the best evidence for why things happened are on tape at each game. Everybody had their chance to prove themselves on the field of play and in the end, those 2 guys were let go. However, please remember that it took quite awhile for them to go for a reason. What the reason was I couldn't tell you. Just, they were left on the team for more then just being a nice guy and having great potential.

I was talking with Steve Young the other day as that now he has his new house here in Park City, and I asked him his general impression of the die hard fan. He said they have tremondous amount of book knowledge about the sport, but rarely, at least in his case, did he think they knew what it was they were talking about. He said the biggest misconception from most fans is they are able to get a clue about a guys abilities by watching him on Sunday. However, he said that very few people got to see what happened in practice to make a team decide to do something or not.

Mark Harris, who was a WR on the 49ers and a guy I played ball with in college, said basically the same thing. You only get a certain amount of plays in a game to prove something and sometimes, your never get that chance.

I have parents constantly coming up to me and telling me what they think we should do with the team and how we should use everyone. Of course, I truly believe they are under the impression that that particular idea has never crossed any of the coaches minds. That we have never tried to play certain guys or give them a chance. Hell, I have parents that say that come game time, "my kid can do it". Please. Get a clue. If the kid can't get it right in practice, what the hell makes you think I am going to give him a shot during a game. I want to win. I am paid to win. Not be everyones best friend.

Football is a team sport from top to bottom. Everybody on the field effects everyone else on each play. Give Westbrook a rest. Blame him for everything he didn't do to make this team win and blame Norv for not being able to settle on a kicker one year and have pretty much the worst luck in the world selecting Defensive Co. Just don't give the impression that any one person was the reason the Redskins failed for the last 10 years. Its the whole teams fault and we have moved on to a guy who will make sure that above all else, our players are going to have fun playing football again.

If you get the heart back into a football players playing, you win. I think we're on the right direction for making it happen this year.

[redman]

Originally posted by UtahRedskins

What player, who did not play HB or FB, shined on the Redskins over the last 10 years?

What player over that time was drafted higher, did less, and was given more second chances? And BTW, during the veritable height of his mediocrity, what player managed also to beat the hell out of one of his teammates on TV, and then to also rip off his helmet in a critical intra-division game that cost us an opportunity at a field goal that could have put us in the playoffs. :doh:

[PCS]

Well, certainly this story can possibly explain alot. Of course you have to give M.W. credit for one thing. Even on another team the guy can sure stir things up in Redskins land.

[fish]

Yeah and you also have to give Westy some credit for showing some...........dare I say it?.............CLASS.

If this stroy is ture, and I'll bet it is, we should give him credit for keeping his mouth shut and being a "good soldier". It was plainly obvious that Marty had shunned Westbrook but, then to have a QB come in, disregard corporate policy, throw to the pariah AND WIN THE GAME, and have the "victim" - Westy - remain quiet and tote the party line, well ya just have to give him credit for it.

Remember, that Denver game was HUGE. With our record and upcoming schedule, winning that game kept our playoff dreams alive.

Don't get mr wrong here, I'm not a huge fan of #82. He had numerous chances to be alot better than he turned out to be and was a definite disapointment but fair is fair. He was wronged last year and handled it well.

[bulldog]

bottom line when we clear out all the garbage, the Redskins did not win with Westbrook on the field. He did not make the difference for the team even in years such as 1999 when the Redskins had a solid season.

in the playoff game against the Buccaneers he was shut down completely. just as he was numerous times in his encounters with Deion Sanders and others.

Michael will never amass the kind of stats that he promised as a rookie was his destiny for the simple reason that he didn't work hard enough early on and then having discovered that he needed to prepare himself for the season in mid-career then found out that he was way behind fellow receivers with talent who had dedicated themselves to becoming mature, students of the game.

Jimmy Smith showed that commitment after suffering through a lot more pain and hardship than Michael Westbrook will ever know.

Ditto for Rod Smith.

There is nothing special in recounting the Michael Westbrook story, no big challenges overcome, no adversities fought and conquered, etc........

He has the resume of a typical lazy ballplayer. Had it too easy in college and believed just showing up would work again in the NFL.

Then he became defensive when coaches, media and fans expected more out of him than a picture in the paper of him sitting on the hood of his new Lamborghini :laugh:

his agent should have told him to tone things down until he started to perform up to expectations on the field.

that would have been the smart thing to do.

but, then again, when has Michael Westbrook ever done the smart thing?

[KMP]

Surprising this is not. Jimmy Raye couldn't call for room service let alone call an offensive game plan for four quarters. Like many a Redskins fan I'm so glad Martyball is gone.

[bulldog]

yep, Marty's term here read like a train wreck for the most part, but it doesn't exonerate Mr. Westbrook because he had not been operating at peak efficiency even before Caesar Schottenheimer and family showed up at the door.

[Utah]

Ok bulldog, name the player we did win with during the last 7 years?

Or better yet, name me a player who would of done better for us had Westbrook not been here because he would of proven he was an elite player being overshadowed by Westbrook.

Somewhere in the last 7 years, Westbrook did something to you because nobody has such a "spit on the grave" attitude towards him than you do. Doesn't really matter.

The man is gone. I think your having a dead horse problem. Its ok, you can leave it alone.